> On Friday, 21 March 2014 01:08:38 UTC+1, Virgil wrote:> > In article <4bJWu.19896$x%2.3254@fx02.iad>,> > > > "Dan Christensen" <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote:> > > > > > > > > Then let us know whether pi is a natural number - from the Peano axioms > > > > > which, according to you, "fully capture the common intuition of the > > > natural > > > > > numbers".> > > > > > > > First give us your definition of pi.> > It is the circumference of an ideal circle divided by its diameter.> You can also understand the area of this circle divided by it radius^2 as pi.> > > > > > > > I suspect that your definition will clash with the Peano axioms using > > either 0 or 1 as the non-successor natural and x + 1 as successor of x> > That is obviuos. But the modern logicians do not know what +1 means.

The ones outside of WM's wild weird world of WMytheology do,but WM can only speak for those incarcerated within his WMytheology.--